Re: Five New Signings : Wed Sep 28, 2016 6:47 pm  

vastman wrote:

If that's the clubs stance I see nothing unreasonable in it. TBF on MC a man I don't always agree with he's never claimed to be a sugar daddy so he's right it is down to the fans.

Whilst every good business manager has to balance the books, MC uses the mantra about the Trinity fans getting the squad "they deserve" as more of a threat than as a means to encourage people to part with their hard earned cash.

The club still has to sell itself to the public of Wakefield.

The Glover - Elston regime were excellent on the selling side and pitiful on the accounting side.

I kmow there is no magic wand (unless my Euromillions ticket comes in) but, we need to encourage more people to come to BV and saying that "you" (the supporters) will get the team you deserve is more of a turn off than a turn on.

Re: Five New Signings : Wed Sep 28, 2016 7:22 pm  

Scarlet Pimpernell wrote:

The squad we have and the quality of the signings are entirely down to the supporters apparently. If they do not commit to a season ticket then the money available will be less and the squad will suffer accordingly. The problem is only the diehards will buy now the majority will wait to see who the club are signing. It's the classic chicken and egg situation does the club gamble and sign better players in the expectation that it will sell more season tickets or hold back and hope that the supporters weaken and buy anyway.
I don't know what we do with the Sky money or the sponsorship but it is obviously not enough to guarantee a good squad of players.

Don't think so... Chester knows who we are signing and deals have been done by the sound of things.
MC and the board will have their squad and it will have been factored into the finances.

However if we manage to increase income over budget players always become available as the season progresses and we may strengthen the squad later.

Re: Five New Signings : Wed Sep 28, 2016 8:48 pm  

Mable_Syrup wrote: I'm guessing it goes into keeping the ground maintained. But I agree the sky money should ensure every club pays full cap. More corporate at a new/upgraded ground will really help matters. I wouldn't want to bring a prospective business to belle view I mentioned that in a thread a bit back and MC replied to my post and said that we get about 1.4 million from Sky. Since then I kept seeing people repeat that clubs get about the full cap from Sky. So I thought I'd look into it to find the details of the last Sky deal and how it broke down for each club and I found this article in TotalRL. http://www.totalrl.com/ins-outs-super-leagues-lucrative-new-tv-deal/ In it it lays down how all the Sky money will be spent. The bit that was interesting is- Under the terms of the new contract the annual payment to Super League clubs will rise to £1,825,000 per club, which will just about cover the salary cap. I don't know if this article is 100% correct but you'd think they'd have fact checked before printing, then again I've no reason to not believe what MC said. Bit confusing really.

Mable_Syrup wrote: I'm guessing it goes into keeping the ground maintained. But I agree the sky money should ensure every club pays full cap. More corporate at a new/upgraded ground will really help matters. I wouldn't want to bring a prospective business to belle view I mentioned that in a thread a bit back and MC replied to my post and said that we get about 1.4 million from Sky. Since then I kept seeing people repeat that clubs get about the full cap from Sky. So I thought I'd look into it to find the details of the last Sky deal and how it broke down for each club and I found this article in TotalRL. http://www.totalrl.com/ins-outs-super-leagues-lucrative-new-tv-deal/ In it it lays down how all the Sky money will be spent. The bit that was interesting is- Under the terms of the new contract the annual payment to Super League clubs will rise to £1,825,000 per club, which will just about cover the salary cap. I don't know if this article is 100% correct but you'd think they'd have fact checked before printing, then again I've no reason to not believe what MC said. Bit confusing really.

Re: Five New Signings : Wed Sep 28, 2016 9:43 pm  

I can categorically state we do not get 1.825 central funding. We got 1.495 this year plus 100k towards the academy (which we have to match) and 100k goes into our foundation. Our costs are roughly 3.3 million so the sky money doesn't even cover half!

Re: Five New Signings : Wed Sep 28, 2016 10:27 pm  

One wont be Sam Williams he has re signed with the raiders for 1 year.

Re: Five New Signings : Wed Sep 28, 2016 11:03 pm  

Every effort should be made to sign Hampshire .

Re: Five New Signings : Wed Sep 28, 2016 11:08 pm  

vastman wrote:

Nobody would - frankly if all we get from any deal is a re-vamped the east stand with boxes and connect it to an upgraded Cats bar then that would do for me. It's a base to build from where sponsors and players can be treated in a professional manner. I keep saying get this right and get the big rollers on board then the rest will come.

The rest of the ground in all honesty is ok just needs the terracing etc brought up to scratch which could be done by a supporters group like they have at Fev.

I now inhabit the north stand and if the bogs were upgraded and the terracing repaired and tidied up I'd be more than happy with that - ditto the west terrace for away fans, most of whom enjoy the old style freedom it offers. Eventually a terrace could be built very cheaply at the south end. See Dewsbury stadium.

However for now so long as the prawn sandwich brigade are catered for I'm happy.

Honestly I'm not being sarcastic here but I agree.
I've said before on here Belle Vue is one of my favourite away games. As long as its not raining I enjoy the walk down from Heath and despite the restricted view from the Western Terrace ( not as bad as some make out ) its a good rugby league venue. It was a bit disappointing this year to be denied access to some bars and outside pubs due to wearing Cas colours but you would hope that can be resolved as its loss of income.
Finally I've just seen figures where your average attendance increase ( just short of 19% ) was the best in super league. Congratulations on that.

Re: Five New Signings : Wed Sep 28, 2016 11:12 pm  

bellycouldtackle wrote:

Every effort should be made to sign Hampshire .

Theres a video on several sites with all Denny's record breaking tries for the season. Play it a few times and watch Rockies input into quite a few. I'd love Cas to keep him as in the "super 8's he really seemed to enjoy himself but I suppose it will come down to what Wigan want

Re: Five New Signings : Thu Sep 29, 2016 5:40 am  

Williams staying put and we sign Grix on a two year deal.

Hardly a convincing start to our recruitment drive.

Can see us getting the dregs as per usual.

That said, bearing in mind our SL status was confirmed two months ago and they did say once that happened we would start to strengthen the squad

Re: Five New Signings : Thu Sep 29, 2016 6:55 am  

Eastern Wildcat wrote:

Williams staying put and we sign Grix on a two year deal.

Hardly a convincing start to our recruitment drive.

Can see us getting the dregs as per usual.

That said, bearing in mind our SL status was confirmed two months ago and they did say once that happened we would start to strengthen the squad

If the players that we are signing are still contracted and playing for other clubs, I dont think that we should be naming our new players.
One major plus of retaining our SL status 2 months ago, compared with last season (not knowing till the last game), is that weve had a extra time to try and sort things out and hopefully this will help.

It would be great if we could afford a couple of "names" to get the fans excited and create a buzz ahead of the new season.